Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Whereas I take issue with the IESG (and IAB) making statements that
should be handled (a) through our normative processes and document
series; and (b) where there should be certain standards across our
document series, and this is one of them.

On 5/31/15 3:38 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
>
> --On Saturday, May 30, 2015 18:19 -0500 Spencer Dawkins at IETF
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> More broadly than just to John ...
> And my note was a little bit of an over-specific response to
> Eliot and David.  To be clear, modulo the quibble about putting
> one toe into the Acknowledgments swamp, rather than either
> keeping it out or jumping in all the way, I think the IESG's
> handling of this is, AFAICT, just right and shows sensitivity to
> all of the right issues.   I am also reasonably confident that,
> if the IESG does not assert authority I don't think it has or
> should have, the other streams and the RSE can (and likely will)
> take care of themselves.  I didn't see any signs of such
> assertions before in this situation; your note provides
> reassurance that I didn't just miss them :-)
>
>     john
>
>
>